Determining the place of artificial intelligence in civil law
Abstract
This article analyses the civil-law aspects of the legal regime of artificial intelligence. According to the author, understanding robot and artificial intelligence as a subject of civil legal relations is inappropriate and can create a situation of legal uncertainty. The use of the term "electronic person" in EU normative acts seems unreasonable and premature since the extension of the term in law does not give a holistic legal representation in matters of their legal status, civil liability, protection of user rights or data protection. It is argued that it is advisable to understand robotics and artificial intelligence as civil rights objects. It is proposed to apply the legal regime of a high-risk source for artificial intelligence, which is used in such fields as medicine or public administration to better protect the rights of artificial intelligence technology users. In the case of civil liability, the principle of proportionality should be respected: the higher the risk of harm, the higher the measure of liability.
Keywords:
legal regulations, robot, subjects of civilian rights, objects of civilian rights, responsibilityReferences
Allen S., Costelloe D., Fitzmaurice M., Gragl P., Guntrip E., Private Interests and Private Law Regulation in Public International Law Jurisdiction, Oxford Handbook on Jurisdiction in International Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2018. Google Scholar
Baranov P.P., Mamychev A.Y,. Plotnikov A.A, Voronov D.Y. Voronova E.M., Problems of Legal Regulation of Robotics and Artifcial Intelligence in Russia: Some Approaches to the Solution, „Herald NAMSCA” 2018, No. 3. Google Scholar
Bennett Moses L., How to Think About Law, Regulation and Technology: Problems with ‘Technology’ as a Regulatory Target, „Law, Innovation and Technology” 2013, No. 5(1). Google Scholar
Bělohlávek A.J., Rozehnalová N., Czech Yearbook of International Law. Vol. III, Public policy and order public Huntington, New York Juris 2012. Google Scholar
Calo R., Robotics and the Lessons of Cyberlaw, „California Law Review” 2015, No. 513(63). Google Scholar
Cebera A., The Paradigms for Distinguishing between Private Law and Public Law, „Zeszyty Naukowe Towarzystwa Doktorantów UJ Nauki Społeczne” 2014, No. 8(1). Google Scholar
Chagal-Feferkorn K.A., Am I an Algorithm or a Product? When Products Liability Should Apply to Algorithmic Decision-Makers, „Stanford Law & Policy Review” 2019, No. 30. Google Scholar
Cole G.S., Tort Liability for Artifcial Intelligence And Expert Systems, „Computer/Law Journal” 1990, No. 10(2). Google Scholar
Epstein R.A., Animals as Objects, or Subjects, of Rights, „U Chicago Law & Economics”, Olin Working Paper 2002, No. 171(35). Google Scholar
Floridi L., On Human Dignity as a Foundation for the Right to Privacy, „Philosophy & Technology” 2016. Google Scholar
Grin’ko S.D., Delìktozdatnìst’ nepovnolìtnìh fìzicnih osìb za civìl’nim zakonodavstvom Ukraïni ta zarubìžnih kraïn: porìvnal’no-pravovij analìz [Juvenile delinquency under the Ukranian civil law and the law of other countries: a comparative study], „Casopis civìlìstiki” 2015, No. 19. Google Scholar
Hrapcenko V.P., Vìd kriterìïv podìlu sistemi prava na galuzì do kompleksnih galuzej prava [The criteria of the division within the legal system regarding complex branches of the law], „Aktual’nì Problemi Polìtiki” 2015, No. 55. Google Scholar
Hryniak A., Pleniuk M., Mechanism of Private Legal Contracting Relations in Civil Law, „Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues Research” 2018, No. 21(1). Google Scholar
Nad’on V.V., Deakì aspekti viznacennâ pravozdatnostì v civìl’nomu pravì [Justice in civil law], „Teorìa ì Praktika Pravoznavstva” 2014, No. 1(5). Google Scholar
Priluc’kij R.B., Osnovnì teorìï uridicnoi osobi ta ïh vpliv na rozvitok organìzacìjnih form sub’ektìv gospodaruvanna [The Concepts of legal entity and the development of different forms of legal entities in business], „Uridicna Nauka” 2013, No. 3. Google Scholar
Simon H.A., The Shape of Automation for Men and Aanagement vii (1965) Ryan Calo Robotics and the Lessons of Cyberlaw, „California Law Review” Legal Studies Research Paper 2014. Google Scholar
Spektor O.M., Tvarina ak osoblivij ob’ekt recovih prav [Animals as an object of property rights], „Prikarpats’kij Uridicnij Vìsnik” 2015, No. 3(9). Google Scholar
Tavits G., The Position of Labour Law in the Private Law System, „Juridica International” 2000. Google Scholar
Volkova N. V., Sodo viznacenna pìdstav obmezenna civìl’noï dìezdatnostì fìzicnoï osobi pri rozgladì sprav u civìl’nomu sudocinstvì [On the determination of the grounds for restricting the civil capacity in civil procedure], „Casopis Civìlìstiki” 2015, No. 18. Google Scholar
